Pages

Sunday, August 26, 2012

Almost two months ago, I wrote a post titled "Turning Massachusetts Red," about several of the Republican Congressional candidates running in Massachusetts, Sean Bielat, Jon Golnik, Jeff Semon, and Chris Sheldon:

One thing I think it's important to know is that Massachusetts is not actually a blue state. Yes, really! It's true that there are more registered Democrats than Republicans, but the majority of voters in Massachusetts are independent, not registered with either party (commonly referred to as "unenrolled" here). These unenrolled voters often have conservative or moderate views on many issues, and the Republican message can be appealing to them. Remember, Scott Brown won statewide just two years ago. Voters in Massachusetts have voted for Republicans before, and the world didn't end, and they are willing to do so again this year, perhaps more than any year in recent history...

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) announced recently that it was committing at least $2.2 million in ad buys in Massachusetts, significantly more than they had ever contemplated spending in this state before. By making such a large investment, the NRCC clearly sees multiple Congressional districts as in play for the Republicans this year, and southeastern Massachusetts is the most conservative part of the state...

So, here's the deal: in this modern campaign era, we are not limited to supporting just the candidates in our own neighborhoods, and Republicans need to realize that the ever-stagnant economy and Obama's continual failed leadership means many more districts are up for grabs than were in 2008.

We don't have to just settle for trying to elect conservatives from red states like Texas. We can play on the Democrats' turf (or at least what they think is theirs!), and we can win.

Besides, what the Democrats really need to worry about is that 51/42 Obama/Romney number. You see, in 2008 Obama beat McCain 62/36; and if you assume that undecideds will break against the incumbent then you are looking at a squeaker, in MA terms. That isn’t as much a harbinger of potential disaster for the Democrats on national terms as it would be in, say, Minnesota; after all, Romney is a former MA governor, so he’s probably going to over-perform McCain in that state (heck, in every state). But it does suggest that Massachusetts Democrats may find Obama problematical on the state level in November…

For the first time in their adult lives, the progressive movement is wondering out loud whether the “nice guy” Brown is beatable at all, and whether Warren is up to the task. Demands that Warren “nationalize” (how fitting a word!) the race are increasing.

Warren herself seems desperate to lash out on the war on women theme so much so that she is becoming a caricature.

All in all, there is a sense in the air that resembles what took place in early January 2010 when the political world collectively came to the realization that the Democrats had nominated a seriously flawed candidate, and were up against a guy with a unique political talent and ability to connect with the folks.

Make no mistake, Warren’s bizarre handling of her false claim to Native American ancestry has compounded if not caused the problem, as it revealed a personality defect which is not very becoming...

To put it in plain terms, Democrats selected a class and sex warrior when people are not concerned with those issues.

This is what is happening on the ground in Massachusetts. And yet, despite repeated examples of how the Democrats' strategy is failing to win over voters, they continue to charge ahead at full speed.

The Republican Convention is focusing on jobs, the economy, and national debt issues. There is an entire day where the theme will be "We Built This!" - attacking Obama's silly "you didn't build that comment."

The Democrats, on the other hand, will follow up the next week by focusing on contraception and abortion. They gave a key speaking spot to Sandra Fluke, whose claim to fame is her Congressional testimony whining about how her Catholic university wouldn't pay for her birth control pills.